I am actually watching Back to the Future 2 at this moment and reading an article on augmented reality and the progression that MS wants to do with Illumiroom to break the boundaries of our TVs for video games.

Great timing for a topic on reality and our perception and effect on it.

"The quantum mind–body problem refers to the philosophical discussions of the mind–body problem in the context of quantum mechanics. Since quantum mechanics involves quantum superpositions, which are not perceived by observers, some interpretations of quantum mechanics place conscious observers in a special position".

"The structure of the multiverse, the nature of each universe within it and the relationship between the various constituent universes, depend on the specific multiverse hypothesis considered. Multiverses have been hypothesized in cosmology, physics, astronomy, religion, philosophy, transpersonal psychology and fiction, particularly in science fiction and fantasy. In these contexts, parallel universes are also called "alternative universes", "quantum universes", "interpenetrating dimensions", "parallel dimensions", "parallel worlds", "alternative realities", "alternative timelines", and "dimensional planes," among others".

I for one believe time is not linear but that we as humans are limited in our ability to perceive it as anything but linear do to our biological limitations (4th dimensional brain). I am also a firm believer in the Multiverse theory. Every action creates an alternate time line which can be considered an alternate reality or universe. This is due to the nature of observation on reality and that every choice has an infinite amount of outcomes. For those interested in these topics I highly suggest reading Greg Bears "The City at the End of Time". While fiction I believe it to be one of the finest works regarding timelines and the nature of the universe. It's also kick ass hard sci-fi with a dose of Clive Barker-ish dark fantasy thrown in for good measure. If that book doesn't tweak your melon well then I don't know what will....

Sounds real smarty pants so you might have to believe it.

How about we chalk it all up to different perspectives on reality coming from each conscious mind? Makes more sense than multiverses theories and other clever, but utterly useless, ideas.

Well there's no such thing as a useless idea. That's just arrogance, but yes everyone take on reality is different because it's filtered through your mind and experience. The point of the thread was to examine reality in a bit more esoteric and theoretical manner....

Arrogance is a buzzword for attempting to counter positions without a stable defense.

Exploring the "theoretical and esoteric" sides of reality is the product of thinking entirely too much. Most might consider the nature of reality as being a cruel and heartless bitch. To a minority of naive and insipid minds; a fairy tale where everything always works out. Reality is simply what is real, not the trippy, air-headedness musings of believers, whom invented ideas which ultimately lead to the detriment of practical developments for the greater good of humanity.

Theorizing is, at least scientifically, a relatively safe way to think without deluding the frail human consciousness into mere thought alone having any effect on reality. Prayer, for instance, is a delusional state entered into when those who can't and won't accept the difficulty of a real situation need assistance. It is a condition reflex similar to a child's, where they ask of their divine parent for the proverbial milk to console their nervous fidgeting.

Reality is only one thing and one thing alone; the one state of being of all things comprised of matter and energy. It's not magical in the sense of the esoteric. Only science may rationally and sensibly explain the nature of reality outside the primary definition, since it requires proof for it's laws. Faith is immediately discounted, since it requires no proof, rendering it technically insane.

Oh so now you get all philosophical. So then you're saying that your interpretation of reality is in fact the true nature of reality. You just contradicted your previous post with that statement. So if it's not quantifiable it doesn't exist? And if you truly believe there is such a thing as "thinking too much" that is a narrow and arrogant worldview. But hey that's just my opinion. I'm entitled to have both an opinion and an asshole... BTW I totally agree with you on the whole "faith" thing. That's just an excuse for not critically analyzing any of your beliefs...

Come on -Vega- you started this post but haven't said shit. Just posted some youtube video...

If we are assholes for being right, then we are in the highest echelon of assholes.

I have no interpretation reality, as all I stated was the simple and irrefutable definition of reality.

Philosophy is meant to teach wisdom, but what is so wise about taking a philosopher's word for what is true? The only real wisdom is gained from experience. Philosophy often trails off into the bedwetting of self-denial in order to appear upright. When the hallucinatory religious part creeps into it, that's a cue for the people who are "meant to be in control" to stop listening, i.e. blue bloods and "upper crust" people.

As for mine or anyone's beliefs, where does belief, besides justifiable true belief, defined by believing what can be proven, have any place in reality? Why even use the term belief, since it will likely be confused for holding a religious perspective as being true over all others with the possible willingness to die for that idea called fanaticism?

Props, That was a very insightful and well thought out argument. I find no faults with your logic as it is yours and thus true to you. Well played sir!

You can argue with anything, so why not try finding the faults? They are there if you chose to root them out, but what did you do instead just a moment ago? Sarcasm in place of any real effort. If that's the way you see the reality of debate, then I won't try to alter it.

All in red applies to me, every single day, for the last 3-4 months when all of my issues finally snowballed as my world view irreversibly crashed when my brain finally snapped. It took less than a second to occur as a result of preceding events spanning the last 5 years of my life.

This is before I even knew about this philosophically described type of crisis, yet reading it I felt like I was reading some kind of autobiography of myself. It's very, very real, and yet there are people who reject the idea that it's real.

Right now as I write this, distraction and sublimation apply to me. There are some things that you can take the philosophical word for, although sometimes I wish they weren't so damn right..

Speculations. What is real is real, and the idea that it may not be will always remain just that, it may not be real, unsubstantiated and unfounded. Solipism is bad metaphysics and bad philosophy, and is only tenable as pure speculation, because it is unprovable, contrary to the spirit of philosophy, which seeks to prove its own assertions.